Wonder Woman 1984 (2020)

[The Dark Knight]

The '80's setting is just perplexing, as there really isn't any big story reason on why it had to be set in the 1980's to be perfectly honest. Course, WW1984 was green lit under the time frame where Stranger Things and the 80's setting was a big deal, so that's probably the major reasoning behind it.

There's a desire to fill in the timeline, and usually I would be supportive of that. But not here. The original intention of WonderGal was this:

"A hundred years ago I walked away from mankind; from a century of horrors."

That statement is cut and dried, but it was deviated from because it's not 'heroic'. I am not interested in pure heroism. I am interested in the struggle people endure while they're on the path of the hero. The whole point of BvS and ZSJL is that Superman woke them all up with his sacrifice. Whether or not they wanted to emerge, the situation demanded it. Superman was not the first hero (that was Diana), but he was the most important. BvS is the true starting point for the DCEU. It's the modern day. It's the grand reveal of not just Wonder Woman, but all the other superpowered beings that followed her.

WW84 may have some decent aspects to it, but the basis for the movie is counterproductive in the context of an established shared universe. The BvS comment of walking away from mankind should have been left alone. What is 100 years for someone who barely ages? If the lack of heroism aspect was too much to swallow, they could've had Diana return to Themyscira during that time.

Truthfully, it felt like the film was more focused on emulating Richard Donner and to some extent, the MCU, than it was being a 'true' followup to the 2017 Wonder Woman movie.

If that is the mentality of Jenkins, I'd rather she be cut loose. Snyder has the right approach to the characters in the modern context, as Matt Reeves seem to.

[Kamdan]

Well, the thing is is that Wonder Woman is aware Steve is in someone else's body pretty much from the get go. But she's been longing for Steve for so long, she's convinced herself that there has to be some way in restoring the guy's body back to him, along with Steve being able to remain with her. Eventually, Steve has to gently tell her this isn't possible, and that's where Diana breaks down emotionally.

Could have achieved the same outcome with the reveal pushed later. How it played off came off too creepy and selfish that they were violating someone else's body and life being in perilous situations. It's not ridiculous to think that man's face went on the most wanted list, but I guess it's all for nothing since they had everyone renounce their wish.

I guess I took it a little differently. My interpretation wasn't that Diana was being stuck up, but remaining aloof and distant for years in the idea that refraining from relationships would spare her from the emotional devastation of eventually losing them down the line. As she is the immortal, and they are not. It's also worth noting she's distant with both males, and females in the movie as well. As Diana even acts aloof with Barbara. One could also say that this is a form of 'survivors guilt' as well. I guess it's up to the viewer on how well this is conveyed, but that's interpretation I got. I get the disguise argument though.

Would have required little effort on the filmmakers to establish that Diana relates more to older people than she does people who appear her own age, but that seems out of Gadot's acting range. At no point does she ever seem like an "old soul." That taxi scene could have as simple as someone not holding the door for her when she goes to work to give her the sense that chivalry is dead. Instead, she comes off very snobbish and stuck up. She even tried to blow off Barbara at first saying she was busy. Maybe establish that Etta and her constantly had dinner together and now that she's gone, it's a huge void to fill and recognizes Barbara has some of her old friend's qualities to pay off the fact that she enjoys her company at lunch.

Wiig as Cheetah just didn't do it for me. The portrayal, nor the movie version of the character. I think I would have just saved Cheetah for the third film, and have Eva Green play her. But beggars can't be choosers.

OH, MY GOD. You made me picture Eva Green as Wonder Woman. That would have been pitch perfect in my mind's eye. She's got the right look and chops to do it. Gadot just has looks.

Consequences would have worked, and definitely so under a more Snyder-esque vision, but I think since this film was wanting to lighten things up for the MCU crowd, along with clearly being influenced by the Donner Superman films, having a child die would have made this film more uneven than it already is. The golden armor has never really had much substance in the comics, and I think it was originally conceived for Elseworlds' Kingdom Come miniseries that eventually bled over into the main continuity. WW1984 tried to give it a bit more of a significant context, but it's brief appearance, and instantly getting torn apart wasn't no big loss.

Taking the approach that no one can get hurt when things like that happen severely lowers the steaks in an action movie like this. One of the very subtle things that I liked in the first film was how Diana marveled at the side of a child in a carriage and then later sees one crying in the arms of a mother later. When everything is happy go lucky where shoplifters almost recklessly kill someone without being reprimanded for it makes this an uneventful and unfulfilling experience. This was more like Richard Lester's Superman than Richard Donner's Superman.

The worst thing about this whole film is that it was reported a year ago that this movie had very bad test screening and it appears that they did nothing to correct them. The only thing I could definitely tell they re-shot was tacked on Christmas setting ending.

[The Laughing Fish]

It's an uneven film for sure (and the opening credits literally has Geoff Johns' name all over the place ... to which I couldn't help but think of TLF over here on the forums haha)

Hahaha.

As I said before, I don't have much interest in WW84, and the fact you mentioned that Donner was an influence is not surprising because Johns and Jenkins are both huge fans of the Reeve Superman era. I've no doubt in my mind that the Williams theme that had a cameo in Josstice League was ordered by Johns, because he was one of the producers.

Consequences would have worked, and definitely so under a more Snyder-esque vision, but I think since this film was wanting to lighten things up for the MCU crowd, along with clearly being influenced by the Donner Superman films, having a child die would have made this film more uneven than it already is.

Anyone who expected such consequences in a DC film that was tailored to meet mass audience appeal is kidding themselves. After the overblown backlash people raged for MOS and BvS, and how WB butchered JL in an attempt to satisfy current popular tastes, there was no way WB would dare show kids in danger in a Wonder Woman film that was made to be "fun".

But then again, who really knows what mainstream audiences want? They bitched about Batman and Superman killing villains, but never made a single peep when Diana did the same in her first solo outing. We heard of media narratives that the DCEU needs to brighten up to "catch up to the MCU", but WW84 doesn't appear to satisfy that many people, nor did Josstice League before. And the films that did well critically didn't do that great at the box office.

There's no point in trying to satisfy naysayers and mainstream bloggers.

As far as DCEU continuity is concerned, the whole thing is a mess now. The best thing for WarnerMedia/AT&T to do now is putting their money where their mouth is and commit to a multiverse, where the likes of Zack Snyder and so on are allowed to continue their own continuity, and let others have theirs.

[The Joker]

There's a desire to fill in the timeline, and usually I would be supportive of that. But not here. The original intention of WonderGal was this:

"A hundred years ago I walked away from mankind; from a century of horrors."

That statement is cut and dried, but it was deviated from because it's not 'heroic'. I am not interested in pure heroism. I am interested in the struggle people endure while they're on the path of the hero. The whole point of BvS and ZSJL is that Superman woke them all up with his sacrifice. Whether or not they wanted to emerge, the situation demanded it. Superman was not the first hero (that was Diana), but he was the most important. BvS is the true starting point for the DCEU. It's the modern day. It's the grand reveal of not just Wonder Woman, but all the other superpowered beings that followed her.

WW84 may have some decent aspects to it, but the basis for the movie is counterproductive in the context of an established shared universe. The BvS comment of walking away from mankind should have been left alone. What is 100 years for someone who barely ages? If the lack of heroism aspect was too much to swallow, they could've had Diana return to Themyscira during that time.

Ideally, I agree 110%.

By going with the 'it's year 1984' route, it's "cheap" in the sense that it means we have a story without real consequences except that our main characters were affected by their experiences, but when you're going about slotting a prequel in somewhere, any consequences are likely to be thoroughly minimal.

I think the film attempted to have it both ways, with Diana remaining on as Wonder Woman in a incognito sense, but remaining emotionally detached/distant/uninvolved for decades with the majority of people she came into contact with (apparently her only close friends being the rag tag group she fought with during WW1). I can go with the aspect of a emotionally detached Diana (because it kinda/sorta aligns with her statement in BvS), but unfortunately, the fact that Diana worked incognito as Wonder Woman thru the decades (assumingly) still contradicts her presentation from BvS. Again, it's a case of the movie pulling itself in several different directions, and without any attempt at course correcting.

I would love for that Snyder approach/tonal mood to return in a big way for the DCEU, Post-ZSJL, but I guess we'll see. Apparently whoever handles AT&T's twitter handle is a big fan. 

If that is the mentality of Jenkins, I'd rather she be cut loose. Snyder has the right approach to the characters in the modern context, as Matt Reeves seem to.

Jenkins has been questionable as of late. With the recent reveal that she wanted Thewlis to be revealed as Ares, but remaining in a 3 piece suit the entire time for the concluding confrontation between Wonder Woman and Ares. Nah. No thanks. I am actually glad the studio stepped in on that one. The George Perez take on a armored up Ares was not only outstanding, but a great visual. I prefer there being an attempt/version to have Ares represent how he appears in the comics, rather than going the route of subverting expectations.

[The Joker]

Could have achieved the same outcome with the reveal pushed later. How it played off came off too creepy and selfish that they were violating someone else's body and life being in perilous situations. It's not ridiculous to think that man's face went on the most wanted list, but I guess it's all for nothing since they had everyone renounce their wish.

I think Diana still wanting desperately to find a way for Steve to remain with her would have stood. Even if this body borrowing was played out differently. She's been 'wishing' for him to come back to her for nearly 70 years at this stage.

Would have required little effort on the filmmakers to establish that Diana relates more to older people than she does people who appear her own age, but that seems out of Gadot's acting range. At no point does she ever seem like an "old soul." That taxi scene could have as simple as someone not holding the door for her when she goes to work to give her the sense that chivalry is dead. Instead, she comes off very snobbish and stuck up. She even tried to blow off Barbara at first saying she was busy. Maybe establish that Etta and her constantly had dinner together and now that she's gone, it's a huge void to fill and recognizes Barbara has some of her old friend's qualities to pay off the fact that she enjoys her company at lunch.

I think what they were trying to convey, is that Diana is choosing to self isolate. Choosing to remain distant. Choosing to be aloof. Choosing to be brief with people. ect. It's like her only 'joy' is when she's working incognito as Wonder Woman for brief periods of time. Course this changes when Steve magically returns to her, but there's a catch as always. And in this case, more ways than one.

Can't say I'm going to monday morning quarterback this. It's not executed to a completely satisfactory level, but I see what they were trying to attempt with this.

OH, MY GOD. You made me picture Eva Green as Wonder Woman. That would have been pitch perfect in my mind's eye. She's got the right look and chops to do it. Gadot just has looks.

I don't mind Gal as Wonder Woman. She's an attractive woman. I just wanted an attractive Cheetah and Wigg/McKinnon just ain't it. Attractiveness is subjective, sure. I just dig it when Eva Green plays a villainess (especially with those eyes!). Plus her hair color is more in line with Barbara Minerva. Blonde is traditionally more Priscilla Rich.

There's no point in trying to satisfy naysayers and mainstream bloggers.

It's like chasing a crowd, who simply isn't there. Comics has been doing this for years and years, and it hasn't worked out well for them at all.

As far as DCEU continuity is concerned, the whole thing is a mess now. The best thing for WarnerMedia/AT&T to do now is putting their money where their mouth is and commit to a multiverse, where the likes of Zack Snyder and so on are allowed to continue their own continuity, and let others have theirs.

I think with this embracing of the multiverse concept, getting multiple versions of the same character running at the same time is going to be a thing. If that's a negative or positive is up to the viewer, but any remaining notions that multiple versions is going to be confusing for the masses is pretty much null and void.

WB/AT&T may as well just go nuts with the concept.

[Kamdan]

I think Diana still wanting desperately to find a way for Steve to remain with her would have stood. Even if this body borrowing was played out differently. She's been 'wishing' for him to come back to her for nearly 70 years at this stage.

Guess she never heard of this obvious Monkey's Paw plot, especially how it was right in her face from the beginning.

I think what they were trying to convey, is that Diana is choosing to self isolate. Choosing to remain distant. Choosing to be aloof. Choosing to be brief with people. ect. It's like her only 'joy' is when she's working incognito as Wonder Woman for brief periods of time. Course this changes when Steve magically returns to her, but there's a catch as always. And in this case, more ways than one.

Too much assumption that the audience will pick up on that. Shame that they bared no mind that they were dealing with a character who's been though seven decades of changes in the world. Diana just came off contemporary and not at all timeless.

[The Joker]

Guess she never heard of this obvious Monkey's Paw plot, especially how it was right in her face from the beginning.

I think Steve mentions directly the Monkey's Paw story if I am not mistaken. I don't think it was a case of her being oblivious to what the dream stone represented, but more of a desperate 'we can find a out on this/fix this' due to her reluctance in death separating her from her soul mate once again (and apparently souls exist in the DCEU as Steve does mention about being in a "good place" following his actual death). Kinda surprised they didn't go full on MCU after that statement with some good ol' humor about Steve vaguely remembering seeing a ghostly figure with a green cloak or something.

[The Dark Knight]

By going with the 'it's year 1984' route, it's "cheap" in the sense that it means we have a story without real consequences except that our main characters were affected by their experiences, but when you're going about slotting a prequel in somewhere, any consequences are likely to be thoroughly minimal.

I believe the real reason for the 80s setting is the studio's reluctance to move the timeline forward past JL right now. Having a film set in the modern day opens up questions about Batman, Superman and the others' whereabouts. For example, it's clear to me WB are reluctant to use Cavill for anything.

Having a Wonder Woman solo film set in the past remedies that from their point of view, even if it opens up continuity problems. The political undercurrents of WW84 had me concerned from the start. The appeal of Gal in the suit again motivated me to take more of an interest despite that. If the movie ended with the world forgetting all that transpired, it would've gone a long way in addressing some of the continuity concerns - even though WonderGal obviously didn't walk away from mankind. Such an easy out, and it's not taken.

I'm glad Michael Keaton looks set to return as Batman, because it's what we've been wanting for years. But it's telling that the next DCEU film will be Flashpoint, which will serve to change course and tidy things up for them. Notice that only after Flashpoint would WonderGal move into a modern setting.

I would love for that Snyder approach/tonal mood to return in a big way for the DCEU, Post-ZSJL, but I guess we'll see. Apparently whoever handles AT&T's twitter handle is a big fan. 

The real continuity for me is Wonder Woman, Man of Steel, Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (UE), ZSJL and Suicide Squad (Ayer Cut). Anything outside of that isn't strict enough and was made under a different mindset. I wouldn't be surprised in the slightest if the studio saw ZSJL as a one-off. We can only support the film in a big way and hope for the best.

Jenkins has been questionable as of late. With the recent reveal that she wanted Thewlis to be revealed as Ares, but remaining in a 3 piece suit the entire time for the concluding confrontation between Wonder Woman and Ares. Nah. No thanks. I am actually glad the studio stepped in on that one. The George Perez take on a armored up Ares was not only outstanding, but a great visual. I prefer there being an attempt/version to have Ares represent how he appears in the comics, rather than going the route of subverting expectations.

The Donner worship is nauseating, and I loathe the arrogance that 'this is the template to make a successful superhero movie'. Push that to the side and make something contemporary. I get the impression Jenkins believes the hype that was generated about her after the first WW film. And so do studios. She's now helming a Star Wars movie and Cleopatra. She had one good movie, and WW84 now represents a bump in the road. I wouldn't be putting all my faith into her. Sustained success is how talent is truly judged.

[The Joker]

I believe the real reason for the 80s setting is the studio's reluctance to move the timeline forward past JL right now. Having a film set in the modern day opens up questions about Batman, Superman and the others' whereabouts. For example, it's clear to me WB are reluctant to use Cavill for anything.

Having a Wonder Woman solo film set in the past remedies that from their point of view, even if it opens up continuity problems.

I really didn't think Warners was all that reluctant in having DCEU films taking place post-JL, TDK, being that both Aquaman, and Shazam are examples of films taking place in a post-JL DCEU world (I can't remember if BOP was stated to take place after or not). I think a WW sequel set in present day was possible, but ideally it would have been a more restrained, personal story, and a much smaller film. Unfortunately, when the 1st movie is a eight hundred million dollar summer blockbuster success, scaling back just isn't in the studio cards. To me, it just came across as a, "well, let's hit on that '80's nostalgia that's popular right now.", along with the studio mindset at the time of wanting to blatantly push away from Snyder's vision. Which, as we've discussed, would cause immediate continuity problems/contradictions right from the jump with how Wondy was introduced in BvS. Just her being active at all, in any capacity, following the events of the 1st film up to BvS, could be seen as a contradiction to her introductory presentation.

I guess the same thing is about to happen with the "Obi Wan Kenobi" prequel series, right?

Having said all that, and since the clear disregard towards the Snyderverse continuity was intentional, Warners/Jenkins/Johns, ideally, may have just well did a "Wonder Woman 197-something" film to be perfectly honest. Especially with the heavy influence of Donner's Superman, and Lynda Carter making an appearance. The 1970's setting would be appropriate, the same plot could be achieved, the obvious fashion gags, and Steve could have remained the man out of time. Course '70's nostalgia in movies doesn't seem to be as prevalent these days, as it was in, say, the 1990's.

The political undercurrents of WW84 had me concerned from the start. The appeal of Gal in the suit again motivated me to take more of an interest despite that. If the movie ended with the world forgetting all that transpired, it would've gone a long way in addressing some of the continuity concerns - even though WonderGal obviously didn't walk away from mankind. Such an easy out, and it's not taken.

The political concerns were well taken, but I found the handling of that to be rather gentle though not altogether absent. I had the same concern with this, and JOKER, but both, to me, were not heavy handed SNL dreck.

I'm glad Michael Keaton looks set to return as Batman, because it's what we've been wanting for years. But it's telling that the next DCEU film will be Flashpoint, which will serve to change course and tidy things up for them. Notice that only after Flashpoint would WonderGal move into a modern setting.

With Flashpoint, it will be fascinating to see if ZSJL is regarded/confirmed as canon within the DCEU. Either by dialogue, or flashback scenes involving Snyder's cut. And if ZSJL is actually addressed and confirmed as having taken place in Flashpoint (which would be notable development), what implications does that shift bring about in the DCEU's path moving forward?

The real continuity for me is Wonder Woman, Man of Steel, Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (UE), ZSJL and Suicide Squad (Ayer Cut). Anything outside of that isn't strict enough and was made under a different mindset. I wouldn't be surprised in the slightest if the studio saw ZSJL as a one-off. We can only support the film in a big way and hope for the best.

Agreed, and I'm with you on hoping for nothing but the best with ZSJL. 

[The Dark Knight]

I really didn't think Warners was all that reluctant in having DCEU films taking place post-JL, TDK, being that both Aquaman, and Shazam are examples of films taking place in a post-JL DCEU world (I can't remember if BOP was stated to take place after or not). I think a WW sequel set in present day was possible, but ideally it would have been a more restrained, personal story, and a much smaller film.

You're right about that. However from what I remember of Shazam it's more or less a self-contained origin story. There are references to Batman and Superman but the actors themselves were never going to be used, and Cavill wasn't. We had a stand-in actor with his head chopped off.

BOP is much the same self-contained thing, and not strutting its shared universe stuff to the fullest potential. A deleted scene had an obscured stand-in for Leto's Joker tossing Harley's belongings outside a second storey window, because, again, they had no intention of using the real actor even if the character was going to feature. Just like what they did with Cavill in Shazam. Margot Robbie said Leto's absence was "intentional."

So we're dealing with modern day DCEU films with limitations due to the studio not being 'all in'. It makes sense to me, if the studio is dancing around characters/actors, to go way back in time and avoid that.

Agreed, and I'm with you on hoping for nothing but the best with ZSJL.

ZSJL is the real deal in terms of Snyder continuity purity. I just hope Matt Reeves' film is good and really does remain separate from the DCEU stuff.